#CaitlinBernard's hearing before the Indiana Medical Licensing board is starting now.

Updates in this thread. 🧵🧵🧵

#CaitlinBernard has been referred to the board by AG Todd Rokita as part of a blatantly publicity-driven persecution of Bernard for a lawful abortion she performed last year.

You can follow here:
https://www.youtube.com/@StateOfIndianaProductions

#INLegis #HoosierMast #Indiana #Abortion

State Of Indiana Productions

State of Indiana Live Streaming and Recordings.

YouTube

Secretary McCann starts out with a note that the board has business items to begin before Bernard's hearing -- as well as a strong admonishment to the people in attendance to maintain decorum.

Stresses that the board will not be answering press questions about the hearing.

The board is now moving on business before getting to the main event. I'll break until #CaitlinBernard's hearing begins.
We're getting started!

The board is hearing a motion to compel Bernard to answer 6 questions that her lawyer advised her not to answer during the deposition.

1. What was the name of the physician who referred her client?
2. Was the physician from columbus?
3. Do you still have the text message with the question?

4. Did Michigan have a trigger law in place?
5. Do you have the coathanger tattoo mentioned in an article in Vanity Fair? (LOL)
6. Should you have alerted Indiana officials?

The state believes this information is relevant and urges the board to grant the motion.

Bernard's counsel responding.

Notes that despite the AGs insinuation, the deposition was delayed based on agreement between parties.

Notes that Bernard actually answered the listed questions during depo.

Notes (hilariously) that the tattoo is irrelevant to proceedings and an attempt to harass.

Did instruct Bernard not to answer questions about trigger laws - as they are irrelevant.

Notes that Bernard was under no obligation to produce records, and that a subpoena against her had already been tossed out.

Question from a board member about why Bernard could not answer the questions in depo and have their relevance adjudicated by the board.

Counsel for Bernard notes they can absolutely ask the questions today and that the question under discussion is potentially irrelevant since the board can, in fact, ask those questions.

Counsel for AG office claims that the motion is still important because they could have used those questions to prepare.

Now asking for a brief adjournment to re-depo (!!) or a continuance.

Counsel for Bernard insists that a continuance is improper. Discovery was closed. Witnesses have been identified. If the state believes they are relevant, the questions can be asked and they can object.